- Mar 11, 2015
- 101,901
- 112,784
- 3,645
This is what we hear from trump supporters or those who claim to be neutral but happen to defend trump in every instance. Apparently they never watched the interviews from members of the trump administration who detail the things trump wanted to do but they stopped it from happening. These people won't be around next time and the supreme court has given him absolute immunity.
Itâs been another dizzying few days in Washington, starting with yet another border controversy, as President Donald Trump threatened to bus unauthorized immigrants to sanctuary cities, and ending with the release of Special Counsel Robert Muellerâs report, which turned out to be far more damning than advertised by Trumpâs attorney general.
These two very different stories have more in common than meets the eye. In each case, thereâs a central tension between the president and aides who refuse to execute orders from him that they believe are illegal or foolish. Muellerâs report is packed with incidents in which White House staff not only didnât do things Trump said, but never had any intention of doing them. In the case of the border, Immigration and Customs Enforcement staff rebuffed Trumpâs plan to bus migrants on legal grounds; meanwhile, Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen and Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Kevin McAleenan refused to turn away migrants seeking asylum, concluding that it was illegal. (Nielsen was sacked soon after, while McAleenan is now her acting replacement.)
In essence, executive-branch employees are hearing orders from Trump and responding, I donât have to listen to youâyouâre just the president. On the one hand, the constitutional system depends on the president executing the law and executive-branch employees following his directives; after all, he is the elected representative of the American people, and they are civil servants. On the other hand, so many of Trumpâs orders are in fact illegal or dangerous that itâs difficult to fault staffers who donât want to endanger the country or legally expose themselves by executing them.
Considering the incidents that are detailed, itâs no wonder. Sometimes aides didnât want to follow orders that would require them to lieâas when Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein refused to say that firing FBI Director James Comey was his idea. At other times, they resisted orders that would violate government guidelines, as when thenâAttorney General Jeff Sessions refused to cancel his recusal on Russia-related matters. And in some cases, they refused to do things to protect Trump from his own worst impulses, as when thenâChief of Staff Reince Priebus told the president heâd ask Sessions to resign, but just didnât do it.
The acme, or the nadir, of noncompliance came from former White House Counsel Don McGahn, who first refused to fire Mueller and then refused to write a letter denying that he had refused to fire Mueller. Told he might be fired, he was defiant: âMcGahn dismissed the threat, saying that the optics would be terrible if the President followed through with firing him on that basis.â McGahn was right, and he wasnât fired then.
McGahn has since left the administration, though. So have Priebus and Sessions. So, too, have Defense Secretary James Mattis, who, according to Bob Woodwardâs Fear, once simply decided to ignore an order to launch airstrikes; and the economic adviser Gary Cohn, who, according to Fear, swiped a letter terminating a trade agreement off Trumpâs desk to avoid his signing it. In each case, the departed staffersâ decisions seem wiser than Trumpâs, and the fact that the president didnât seem to notice their sabotage doesnât speak well to his decision making or attention span.
www.theatlantic.com
You can play this off if you want to because its from The AtlantIc but:
No One Listens to the President
Trump keeps issuing orders, and staffers keep ignoring them because theyâre illegal or unwise. Itâs an unsustainable situationâbut it shows no sign of abating.Itâs been another dizzying few days in Washington, starting with yet another border controversy, as President Donald Trump threatened to bus unauthorized immigrants to sanctuary cities, and ending with the release of Special Counsel Robert Muellerâs report, which turned out to be far more damning than advertised by Trumpâs attorney general.
These two very different stories have more in common than meets the eye. In each case, thereâs a central tension between the president and aides who refuse to execute orders from him that they believe are illegal or foolish. Muellerâs report is packed with incidents in which White House staff not only didnât do things Trump said, but never had any intention of doing them. In the case of the border, Immigration and Customs Enforcement staff rebuffed Trumpâs plan to bus migrants on legal grounds; meanwhile, Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen and Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Kevin McAleenan refused to turn away migrants seeking asylum, concluding that it was illegal. (Nielsen was sacked soon after, while McAleenan is now her acting replacement.)
In essence, executive-branch employees are hearing orders from Trump and responding, I donât have to listen to youâyouâre just the president. On the one hand, the constitutional system depends on the president executing the law and executive-branch employees following his directives; after all, he is the elected representative of the American people, and they are civil servants. On the other hand, so many of Trumpâs orders are in fact illegal or dangerous that itâs difficult to fault staffers who donât want to endanger the country or legally expose themselves by executing them.
Considering the incidents that are detailed, itâs no wonder. Sometimes aides didnât want to follow orders that would require them to lieâas when Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein refused to say that firing FBI Director James Comey was his idea. At other times, they resisted orders that would violate government guidelines, as when thenâAttorney General Jeff Sessions refused to cancel his recusal on Russia-related matters. And in some cases, they refused to do things to protect Trump from his own worst impulses, as when thenâChief of Staff Reince Priebus told the president heâd ask Sessions to resign, but just didnât do it.
The acme, or the nadir, of noncompliance came from former White House Counsel Don McGahn, who first refused to fire Mueller and then refused to write a letter denying that he had refused to fire Mueller. Told he might be fired, he was defiant: âMcGahn dismissed the threat, saying that the optics would be terrible if the President followed through with firing him on that basis.â McGahn was right, and he wasnât fired then.
McGahn has since left the administration, though. So have Priebus and Sessions. So, too, have Defense Secretary James Mattis, who, according to Bob Woodwardâs Fear, once simply decided to ignore an order to launch airstrikes; and the economic adviser Gary Cohn, who, according to Fear, swiped a letter terminating a trade agreement off Trumpâs desk to avoid his signing it. In each case, the departed staffersâ decisions seem wiser than Trumpâs, and the fact that the president didnât seem to notice their sabotage doesnât speak well to his decision making or attention span.
No One Listens to the President
Trump keeps issuing orders, and staffers keep ignoring them because theyâre illegal or unwise. Itâs an unsustainable situationâbut it shows no sign of abating.
www.theatlantic.com
You can play this off if you want to because its from The AtlantIc but:
The Atlantic â Bias and Credibility
- Overall, we rate The Atlantic Left-Center Biased due to editorial positions and High for factual reporting based on excellent sourcing of information and a clean fact-check record.
